[QUOTE]Originally posted by woj1@cyberonic. [B]Buddhism and Communism glorify human beings in contrary to Christianity where life of human being is upfront determinate by God in Protestants; in Catholics human has free will but everything is in God

The salty butter tea IS tasty even if the water might stem from some unidentified water source where urine of the community might be flowing together. All the same. Conditions are so harsh that the hot tea you can get and the one potato that you can heat up are enuf to make feel great happiness in one s heart. In fresh tasty air the body feels less hungry.

Should read that Protestants are better breed than whole Christianity IS AMUSING - period.

You are the amusing one Woj.

Historically protestants were catholics who protested against
corruption and false doctrines and robbing the people and central
imperial control of nations.
The German ( Luther inspired) reforms were perhaps more a case of nationalism than any issues about theology.
Thats when the Slavs should have united.
Most protestant denominations are flirting with Rome again to
form a new world religion.
In other words these lambs intend to lie down next to the lion.
Ask DonQ what comes next, when the Lion invites one to supper.
Thats when the protestants will be well breaded.
They back the lion, I dont and so what makes you think I sponsor them?

Gari-Gari,
the lake and the Potala: destoying the beauty of the lake is the equivalent of graffiti of govt slogans on the walls of the potala.
Its a political and athiest statement.

Because of the natural world austerity the people are naturally likely to be more friendly and trusting than most peoples because the coop type dependance and the perspective of simple reality and joy and appreciation to be found in a non-materialist life. In comparison in the west where people look to tv to make life 'interesting' and artificially stimulate the emotions, one could say that the worst form of austerity is not in Tibet.

Originally posted by Bader " Historically protestants were catholics who protested againstcorruption and false doctrines and robbing the people and centralimperial control of nations.Most protestant denominations are flirting with Rome again toform a new world religion.In other words these lambs intend to lie down next to the lion.

One appreciates tree from their fruits; Bush, Clinton etc. and from their friends as Japan. Protestant Bush criticizes China for control the religion weird and supports Japan to UN seat ignoring Japan crimes ;

Originally posted by Gari-Gari Not even the DL lives in the Potala with a 1000 rooms but instead in a cave.

The Chinese removed all the valuables (statues, thankas, ritual items and adornments) from the Potala. ..If I had no obligations to live in Europe, and I do, I would not hesitate for a sec to move to these harsh circumstances, because they believe in the law of cause and effect.

I saw picture of 1000 rooms DL palace in Saint Anna Museum, DL might not live there. Also exhibition presented many magnificent artifacts; still I am not sure that was communist China that provided them. (-)

Your post remind me our Polish noble who liked their peasants and invited them on desert he appreciated the most ; the wild strawberry with cream. Still I praise more the Leo Tolstoy who share with his peasants the harvest work

Originally posted by Bader [BBecause of the natural world austerity the people are naturally likely to be more friendly and trusting than most peoples because the coop type dependance and the perspective of simple reality and joy and appreciation to be found in a non-materialist life. In comparison in the west where people look to tv to make life 'interesting' and artificially stimulate the emotions, one could say that the worst form of austerity is not in Tibet. [/B]

Publius Cornelius Tacitus AD 56-120Roman orator and public official, probably the greatest historian started his work with statement; At first were golden ages

Originally posted by woj1@cyberonic. I saw picture of 1000 rooms DL palace in Saint Anna Museum, DL might not live there. Also exhibition presented many magnificent artifacts; still I am not sure that was communist China that provided them. (-)

Your post remind me our Polish noble who liked their peasants and invited them on desert he appreciated the most ; the wild strawberry with cream. Still I praise more the Leo Tolstoy who share with his peasants the harvest work

Dear Woj,

I will reply to some other posts in this thread later, let me just quickly say something to your recent post:

DL for sure DOES NOT live in Potala. They chased him out of his country, out of his home. He is living a decent life of no luxury in some other residences (one in CH).

I don t see a wild strawberry mind with cream in my recent post s lines.

Be assured that if I say I d life there this phantasy implies working there. It is hard work in the field that I could do bec though my body is European it is built strong enough and would get stronger there for survival. It would not be easy for me to change from a sedentary work life to a manual one but I have mind flexibility to manage that. Greatest deprivation for me would be a lack of accesibility of books for reading (in languages I read; libraries are not on hand there, in the mountains). Plus the Tibetan language requires a good study for being learned.

Indeed, should there be a third and fourth war that the US are beginning, my decision to mouve out of war zone (Europe would sooner or later have to take a stance) would be clearly to change life style and opt for the life of a farmer or even only helper of a farmer somewhere out there in the desert of Himalaya mountains. And certainly enough I won t be a Polish noble but a creature depending on the strength of it s body, the good luck of destiny to survive and the kindness of unknown pple in the mountains who would allow me to make a start among them and share their first harvest with me.

eventually the artefacts you saw in that museum are the authentic Tibetan pieces that the Chinese had the cruelty to remouve out of the active spiritual context.

These statutes used to receive veneration and were filled with blessings of previous lamas and so on. They were not supposed to be shown in a museum but would have a function to play in the rituals of presently active religion.

But Chinese noticed they can make money with such exhibits, that s why, for now, they did not yet destruct these pieces.

Originally posted by Gari-Gari It s their life and they tend to love it as long as their minds have not gotten invaded by mundane Coca-Cola indoctrination of an illusionist Western happiness-ideology.

The Dalai Lama speaks pretty words, almosts wise. The problem is, all other leaders of the world speak pretty words. The key is doing SOMETHING about it.

How nonspecific words like "make an effort" inspire the people of the world? I would like to hear something more specific, like DO NOT FEED THE LION.

"If we really want the next millennium to be happier, more peaceful and more harmonious ... , we will have to make the effort to make it so."

He listed six arenas of effort:

1. "While engaging in material progress and taking care of physical well-being, we need to pay equal attention to developing peace of mind." 2. "We need to develop more altruism and a sense of caring and responsibility for others.... One could call this 'secular ethics,' as it consists of basic human qualities such as kindness, compassion, sincerity, and honesty." 3. "We must seriously consider the concept of non-violence," starting, said the Dalai Lama with internal disarmament. "By internal disarmament I mean ridding ourselves of all the negative emotions that result in violence." Only from there, he said, can we work toward eliminating nuclear weapons, stopping arms trade, total demilitarization. "Human problems will, of course, always remain, but ... the next century should be one of dialogue and discussion rather than one of war and bloodshed." 4. "We need to address the issue of the gap between the rich and the poor, both globally and nationally. This inequality ... is not only morally wrong, but practically also a source of problems. Equally important is the issue of freedom. As long as there is no freedom in many parts of the world, there can be no real peace." 5. "We need to take care of our earth and of our environment." 6. "Lastly, one of the greatest challenges today is the population explosion. Unless we are able to tackle this issue effectively we will be confronted with the problem of natural resources being inadequate for all the human beings on this earth."

(sorry I hit too early on submit)Well, as for your above post. You are certainly right to criticize that leaders in the world concentrate on making good speeches that impress and convince pple. Speeches that make sense and that one can agree with.

Leaders of the world speak to big crowds, even they speak to a world population listening to them over public broadcast: radio, tv, internet, satellite.

I am not going to iniciate now a big discussion about DL in particular. I have not listened to many other world leaders and am not in the position to justify my opinions and impressions by means of examples or even proofs.

Just one thought: speaking to crowds (=diversified target group; any age group, any social and educational background; any nation) requires the abilty of abstraction. The speaker needs to concentrate on an essence. This essence can not be complicated or detailed, he needs to find general words that can be understood by anybody.

Problem: these simplified speeches give the listener the impression that there is more behind, details of action, that the speaker is hinting at.Some (or most?) political leaders seem to be making promises in their speeches, as understood by the crowds, but in the day-to-day business they will deny that they ever promised details that, in their speeches, they were making allusions of in general words.

The art of holding seeches: Though I find most political speeches annoying because, as you say, they mostly remain "pretty words", I don?t know what politicians and world leaders could do better in their speeches. Speeches can?t be sophisticated if you speek to an unidentified target group (anybody).

What they could be better is related to their actions. World leaders should speak less about environmental issues and do more in the legal and business sector for ensuring that a change to alternative energy providers can be established. (this, to give an example)

DL: quij, I need to disagree with your observation that DL is mostly general in his speeches. That he keeps up the facade.Yes, even DL needs to do that - in his general speeches. But only there. (Or tell me how could his public speeches be better? - As for his actions, exactly he is one "world leader" with the least political power; he has none! All he has is an aura that pple tend to respect.)

DL is decent enough not to use a public speech for explaining in detail, let s say, the "stages of a bodhisattva", which would include indications of how to leave behind anger and regret, the ways of developing tolerance, then loving kindness, love and compassion towards oneself (Metta) and other beings; - apart from being that a complex, lengthy, very detailed description of the path towards enlightenment, which requires in-debths commentaries on single concepts to get a clue about it and to eventually be able to put it to practice making, thus, use of these recommendations for achieving practical aims.

DL is not a specialist on environment but he can see that we need to protect it. Therefore he fulfills his duty in reminding people to care for the environment. What he is not entitled to prescripe is how we should do it.

Also, I think it would be incorrect if DL would try to share many details about what he knows (Tib. Buddh.) with large crowds in a public speech. That would make him a propaganda man for a religion or philosophy that, as a matter of fact, never ever had a wish to expand or to gain "members". DL is not a Christion church. That is why he leaves away some of the doctrine stuff in his public speeches and tries to communicate an essence. This essence is a minimum of ethics that most pple will find ease to agree with. Putting it all in the frame of Tib. Buddh. would bore the listeners, it would create boarders. But a speaker needs to "arrive" to his listeners.

Apart from giving plenty of public speeches around the globe, DL gives also spiritual teachings. Actually this is his main purpose in life. These spiritual teachings are different from his public speeches, even though the spiritual teachings can be accessed by the public.

Listening to DL spiritual teachings is not following pretty words. They discuss difficult subjects that require many life times to be understood - and practiced properly. In the spiritual teachings DL seems to be a "different person" and can even appear to be very uncomfortable at times. He is not the smiling Santa Claus anymore who he needs to be in his public appearances for crowds. In these proper teachings he goes into detailed recipies of what to do and how to do it for working on oneself and contribution to an increase of happiness in this world. Of course, he does this in the frame of what he knows best and that is the Mahayana doctrine. A doctrine has always limitations that is why living teachers are needed to deprive it from limitations. A teacher has experienced and is trained in the practical essence of his doctrine, thus is likely to be able to pass on insights that are beyond the written word. DL is specialist for ethics, it appears, thus he gives instructions on this. He will give very detailed instructions that one can follow or try to follow but that is on a voluntary basis and it can?t be asked of crowds to establish a meditation practice, start a study of sutras and tantras or whatever. Why should one ask that of crowds? It is enough to tell crowds that they should smile more often to their neighbor to enhance international friendship. As DL is not specialist on the environment he will not explain in detail how beneficial it is to separate paper, glass and aluminium for helping recycle these resources etc.

So this is my view of this subject.And plz don t take me as a fervent defender of DL. This is not the motivation or background of this post. Instead, while you state something about "pretty words" I see all the books in the shelves at the wall next to my table: Mahayana scripts, commentaries, Lam-Rim, several volumes of "Buddha s speeches", books on Tib. Buddh. history, a favorite writing by Shantideva, etc. NO, these are not pretty words, these are pretty contents. Crossing fingers that I may finish the thesis one day. It will be a struggle through many difficult words.

"The warrior knows that in all languages the most important words are the small words. Yes. Love. They are words that are easy enough to say, yet fill vast empty spaces." http://www.warriorofthelight.com

"Don t feed the LION." is there in the recommendation of "Don t feed the EGO MIND." (meaning that Ego Mind can be something manifest in the exterior, outside world as well as something interior, part of one s own wrong attitutdes).

Originally posted by Bader Both systems historically lived of the backs of the people.Both have a claim on being god.Both have a similar tradition of a special 'search' for the successorand announce it by smoke from a chimny.Both wear similar clothing and I think celebat.I expect both therefore originated in ancient Babylon along with the statue of women holding child - Queen of Heaven and he reincarnated husband in her son.

If the DL preaches everyone is saved, period; saved from What?The three monotheistic religions ( Jewish, Christian and Muslim)all believe in a day of judgement. One has to conclude then that according the DL there is no real judgement, just a commercial break.

Dear Bader,

Your observations about the similarities between Pope - DL are really cool.

But I don t know what u mean that DL preaches everyone is saved. I never heard or read that. From a certain point of view, one could say that in Budh. everyone is saved but it s not a matter of "by whom". Must be a conclusion stemming from someone else s post. Woj told that DL had stated in a talk that it?s not necessary to believe in a religion/God for being saved (or something like that). One main difference of Buddh. with the monoteistic religions is that Buddh. is not a system in which "faith or belief" would have a central role to play. "Faith" is described as a characteristics necessary in unintelligent pple or those in the very beginning of the path. Buddh. is big on practical experience of what is exposed. It s not about believing in prescribed statements but about describing something and helping pple to confirm that it s true by inner experience.

With DL there is no judgement in an exterior form. There is an accumulation of so-called karmas which is basically saying that one is one s own saviour or enemy. But even then it s much more complicated than that. Xtian pple tend to misunderstand what is meant by karma. Also that accumulating merits-thing is a trap. One can t buy in for enlightenment or being lucky. It s all goes about developing the qualities of the heart, nothing more nothing less.

Bader, yr question had been "Saved from What".I don t think that DL spoke about it publicly. If ever he might speak about salvation from something then that would be something of the following: saved from delusions and ignorance (as opposed to the wisdom which has all insights), saved from cyclic existence, saved from the condition of having to suffer (even having a body is considered a state of suffering), saved from a dualistic mind (dividing the world in "Good" and "Evil" as GWB does )

Originally posted by Gari-Gari Be assured that if I say I d life there this phantasy implies working there. It is hard work in the field that I could do bec though my body is European it is built strong enough and would get stronger there for survival. It would not be easy for me to change from a sedentary work life to a manual one but I have mind flexibility to manage that. Greatest deprivation for me would be a lack of accesibility of books for reading (in languages I read; libraries are not on hand there, in the mountains). .

Bader, Donq, Gari- Gari,;

European monastic communities were set up (from as early as the 2nd century AD) and books were found to be essential to the spiritual life. The rule laid down for observance by several monastic orders enjoined the use of books: I see your all dream for life in mendicant and cenobitic order. Cenobitic monastic life .

Originally posted by Gari-Gari Bader, yr question had been "Saved from What".I don t think that DL spoke about it publicly. http://www.warriorofthelight.com[/url]

He did it , because he was asked. I heard it myself. Salvation is the contrary to condemnation.

We can ask same way about condemnation. Condemnation from what?. Condemnation also has different meaning for different peoples. For one condemnation means hell fire, or lack of 4 virgins in heaven or shame for his name in history. Relativism at work.

thank you for your thought to choose a monastery for me in accordance with my personality. Bulgaria is fine, especially because they are into painting Orthodox icons there which I am very interested to learn. It requires seclution and decades of praxis until one is good in doing it. Same with Athos, they cultivate the icon painting tradition there, as well. It would be a pittoresque place to be. But, as you must have observed over the news, Athos has had already twice some strange things happening over the past few years. The last incident was a sudden fire that destroyed part of invaluable scripts at the library. This happened, if I remember well (no, actually I don t) somewhen around the Madrid bombing or the elections of GW or so. It felt as if Athos is responding to world happenings in a sensible way. Therefore it would not be a good place to live in.

I still prefer a mountain desert where Tibetan culture is still alive, someplace in Ladakh would be optimum.

If you insist in a place in Europe, my next preference would be the convent of Santa Teresa in Avila, Spain. It is the highest plato on the peninsula, the city has a totally preserved Medieval fortification, the sky is blue and sunny and there is a church at every corner of that small town.They also sell good horchata there and the rosaries with beeds made from rose petals. Among Spaniards it s considered a lonely boring place reason for which it s the ideal place work out one s spirituality there.

Another predilect place of mine is Montserrat Monastery in Catalunya. It is wonderful there when the tourist season is low. Magic. But it s up to the Black Madonna to take care of me for deciding the way and manners that would allow me to stay there.

But before I spin forward the idea, let me question your suggestion. Why do u want us (bader, don.quij, me) to go to a monastery and stay there? Eventually we could still be useful as active members within our democracies and societies?!...once the grey coulds of war assemble over the globe, I will, of course, reconsider the monastery version again. We might meet then somewhere

DL: quij, I need to disagree with your observation that DL is mostly general in his speeches. That he keeps up the facade.Yes, even DL needs to do that - in his general speeches. But only there. (Or tell me how could his public speeches be better? - As for his actions, exactly he is one "world leader" with the least political power; he has none! All he has is an aura that pple tend to respect.)

Howdy GariI'm talking about the whole group of leaders from left to right, and from powerless to powerful, who speak pretty words. Nothing in particular about the DL other than some people are dependent on him to bring them peace...:confused:

As things stand we can be assured that no leader will deliver us from doom. The statement in Orwell remains truer than ever.... "The hope lies in the Proles."

I discused with Bader what we could do to TAME THE BEAST and came up with a list of things we could do. People (the Proles) ask me that all the time. For example, DO NOT FEED THE LION (boycott) is something we can do whether powerless or powerful. Sorry to say, PRAYING FOR PEACE is BS. It's time for action.

(Bader, take note of the latest version)

Who will put the bell on the cat? Well, only you can: -DO NOT FEED THE LION* (we are confronting a Hungry Lion, so he's most vulnerable to this) -VOTE WITH YOUR FEET (don't live with predators, don't work for predators, etc--if you can afford it--and that's why we need ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY) -NONVIOLENCE IS BETTER (don't dress as a lion--he loves to play the victim) -CRY LION! (the lion can only prey because of camouflage, so your alarm may save others) -NO LION NO PROBLEM! (do not accept the beast, physically or mentally--mental slavery--in your life) *see "The Role of Boycotts"... http://www.commondre...s04/1118-24.htm

Here's another pretty speech. I wrote to Chirac and it went without reply. Also, I'm posting this very debate in the Tibet newsgroup of Google and it goes ignored. Pretty words is good camouflage...

'In his speech to the World Economic Forum, Mr Chirac spoke movingly of the "silent tsunamis" of famine, disease and violence that regularly strike the developing world with a ferocity as devastating as the natural disaster that caused vast damage on the shores of the Indian Ocean.'

Wonderful words from Chirac. But the world is full of pretty words, and far, far less action. The Silent Tsunamis are silent because they rarely make the news among the non-issues of the day. Many red-herrings are used to keep people off the real issues like poverty, education, healthcare and the environment. Simply they are not a priority... We need something different though, just like the late agronomist Rene Dumont (also French) proposed, a world not based on (unequal) trade but in sustainable, cooperative development, good for the little fish. And yet Chirac's ideas, as noble and gentle as they may be, are likely to go unheard by the predators of this world, for whom "education" is a bad word. They rather bet on Globalization or Law of the Jungle that makes some winners--and many losers. Too bad. And I'm afraid nothing but complete dismantling of the International Jungle--which forces ever growing military budgets--will do. We have to remind Chirac we must face the lions first...